Blood Loss During Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy: Is Preoperative Autologous Blood Donation Indicated?

Purpose

We assessed the requirement for transfusion of allogeneic blood in a contemporary series of patients who did not deposit autologous blood before radical retropubic prostatectomy.

Materials and Methods

After a policy was adopted in which preoperative autologous blood was not donated, 124 consecutive patients underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy. Type and screen for allogeneic blood were routinely available but neither hemodilation nor a cell saver was used.

Results

Mean intraoperative blood loss was 579 cc and mean postoperative serum hematocrit was 33 percent. Only 3 patients (2.4 percent) required blood products due to intraoperative blood loss (2) and postoperative bleeding from a duodenal ulcer (1).

Conclusions

Transfusion of blood products was required in a small percentage of our patients even without autologous blood donation. Therefore, the overall cost of care is decreased but, more importantly, the potential risks associated with autologous or allogeneic blood transfusion are eliminated.     

Blood product storage: does age really matter?

Red blood cell transfusion therapy has been used with the ultimate goal of enhancing oxygen delivery to vital organs and tissue beds, thus enhancing cellular function. Red blood cell transfusion therapy is also a long-standing practice, and since the 1950s it has only grown in utilization, especially within the United States. Recently, transfusion therapy has come under increased scrutiny with a desire to develop evidence-based therapeutic guidelines that not only decrease undue risk to the patient but also decrease the overutilization of this high-cost, low-availability product. Despite the development and implementation of these guidelines, significant complications associated with red cell therapy persist and may be related to storage of blood products. Recently, within the transfusion literature, there has been a renewed focus on red cell storage lesions and their contributions to perioperative outcomes. Several meta-analyses, and now a recently launched, multinational randomized controlled trial, have been initiated to help bring clarity to whether or not the length of product storage has any effect on patient outcomes. This review will focus on the nature of storage lesions, complications associated with storage, as well as a brief review of some of the more provocative literature surrounding this controversial topic.     

What Blood Temperature for an Ex Vivo Extracorporeal Circuit?

Ex vivo circuits are commonly used to evaluate biomaterials or devices used for extracorporeal blood purification. However, various aspects of the ex vivo circuit, apart from the circuit materials, may affect inflammation and coagulation. One such aspect is temperature. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different blood temperature conditions on inflammation parameters in an ex vivo circuit. Blood was collected from 20 healthy volunteers and run through three different experimental conditions for 4 h: a miniaturized ex vivo extracorporeal circuit equipped with a blood warmer set to 37°C, the same circuit without the warmer (23°C), and a tube placed in an incubator at 37°C (no circuit). We measured the granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor, the tumor necrosis factor, and the interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, IL-8, and IL-10 concentrations at baseline, 15, 60, 120, and 240 min. Human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-DR, CD11b, CD11a, CD62L, tumor necrosis factor alpha converting enzyme, annexin V expression, and NFkB DNA binding were measured in monocytes and polymorphonuclear neutrophils (PMNs) using flow cytometry at baseline, 120 min, and 240 min. While cytokine production over time was very slight at room temperature, levels increased by more than 100-fold in the two heated conditions. Differences in the expression of some surface markers were also observed between the room temperature circuit and the two heated conditions (CD11b PMN, P < 0.0001; HLA-DR Mono, P=0.0019; and CD11a PMN, P<0.0001). Evolution of annexin V expression was also different over time between the three groups (P=0.0178 for monocytes and P=0.0011 for PMNs). A trend for a greater NFkB DNA binding was observed in the heated conditions. Thus, for ex vivo studies using extracorporeal circuits, heating blood to maintain body temperature results in significant activation of inflammatory cells while hypothermia (room temperature) seems to suppress the leukocyte response. Both strategies may lead to erroneous conclusions, possibly masking some specific effects of the device being studied. Investigators in this field must be aware of the fact that blood temperature is a crucial confounding parameter and the type of "background noise" they will face depending on the strategy adopted.     

Blood transfusion and cytokines’ changes in total knee replacement

Introduction

The aim of this prospective comparative study was to evaluate the serum levels of different cytokines and the frequency of adverse reactions and wound infections in patients who underwent total knee replacement (TKR) and were not transfused or received either allogeneic blood transfusion or postoperative auto-transfusion (PAT) with unwashed shed blood.

Materials and methods

A total of 248 patients were categorized into three groups; in Group 0 (n 85) patients received no blood transfusion, in Group 1 (n 92) patients received PAT and in Group 2 (n 71) patients received allogeneic blood transfusion. Patient’s demographic and clinical data including age, gender, body mass index, preoperative haemoglobin value, adverse reactions and complications were documented. The serum levels of IL-1b, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10 and TNF were measured preoperatively, and on the first, third and fifth postoperative day. A statistical analysis of the results was performed.

Results

A significant elevation of cytokine values were observed during the first five postoperative days in patients who received blood transfusion after TKR. Adverse reactions (chills and pyrexia) were also more common in patients who received blood transfusion, whereas superficial infections were more common in patients who received allogeneic blood transfusion.

Conclusion

The immunological status—as expressed by the measured cytokine levels—is altered in patients receiving blood transfusion compared to patients receiving no blood transfusion during the first five postoperative days. PAT is preferable to allogeneic blood transfusion in terms of the rate of adverse reactions and superficial wound infections.     

Perioperative Allogeneic Blood Transfusion Is Associated With Surgical Site Infection After Abdominoperineal Resection—a Space for the Implementation of Patient Blood Management Strategies

Allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT) has been reported as a major risk factor for surgical site infection (SSI) in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. However, the association of ABT with SSI in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection (APR) and total pelvic exenteration (TPE) still remains to be evaluated. Here, we aim to elucidate this association. The medical records of all patients undergoing APR and TPE at our institution in the period between January 2000 and December 2012 were reviewed. Patients without SSI (no SSI group) were compared with patients who developed SSI (SSI group), in terms of clinicopathologic features, including ABT. In addition, data for 262 patients who underwent transabdominal rectal resection at our institution in the same period were also enrolled, and their data on differential leukocyte counts were evaluated. Multivariate analysis showed that intraoperative transfusion was an independent predictive factor for SSI after APR and TPE (P = 0.004). In addition, the first–operative day lymphocyte count of patients undergoing APR, TPE, and transabdominal rectal resection was significantly higher in nontransfusion patients compared with transfusion ones (P = 0.026). ABT in the perioperative period of APR and TPE may have an important immunomodulatory effect, leading to an increased incidence of SSI. This fact should be carefully considered, and efforts to avoid allogeneic blood exposure while still achieving adequate patient blood management would be very important for patients undergoing APR and TPE as well.Key words: Colorectal cancer, Abdominoperineal resection, Surgical site infection, Allogeneic blood transfusion, Patient blood managementPostoperative surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most frequent complications associated with various surgical procedures, and it results in adverse outcomes, including longer hospital stay, higher health care costs, and increased surgical mortality.¹ It is one of the most frequent nosocomial complications, accounting for almost one fifth of all health care–associated infections.² Colon surgery and rectal surgery are associated with higher SSI rates compared with most other abdominal procedures, with 5% to 25% of colon and rectal surgery patients developing incisional and organ/space SSI.^3–5 Moreover, the incidence of overall SSI was reported to be higher in rectal surgery patients (17%–28%) than in colonic surgery patients (9%–23%),^3,5,6 with especially higher overall SSI rates observed in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection (APR; 12%–51%).^7–9 These are attributed to the high infection rates of the perineal wound, reported to be as high as 21%.¹⁰ Thus, the incidence of SSI associated with APR should be the highest among the various abdominal operative procedures.Various risk factors for postoperative SSI in colorectal surgery were reported previously. Open surgery,^10–12 perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT),^4,10,12 and prolonged operation time^4,9 have been found to be risk factors for SSI in a number of studies. Although several preceding reports have investigated the risk factors for SSI associated with APR, the reported independent risk factors varied among the studies. Although a number of studies have reported on the role of ABT as a strong risk factor for incisional SSI in colorectal surgery,^13,14 only one study has investigated on its relevance to the onset of incisional SSI after APR procedure; but this study failed to demonstrate a significant association. Presently, therefore, the role of ABT as a potential risk factor for incisional SSI in APR remains to be elucidated, and doing so will be very important for the implementation of measures to achieve patient blood management in this group of patients.In this study, we aimed to elucidate the risk factors for SSI in patients receiving APR, especially focusing on ABT.     

Role of the Extraosseus Blood Supply in Osteoarthritic Femoral Heads?

Blood perfusion to the femoral head might be endangered during the surgical approach or the preparation of the femoral head or both in hip resurfacing arthroplasty. The contribution of the intramedullary blood supply to the femoral head in osteoarthritis is questionable. Therefore, the contribution of the extraosseous blood supply to osteoarthritic femoral heads was measured intraoperatively to question if there is measurable blood flow between the epiphysis and metaphysis in osteoarthritic hips in case of extraosseus vessel damage. At defined points during surgery we acquired the epiphyseal and metaphyseal femoral head perfusion by high-energy laser Doppler flowmetry. Complete femoral neck osteotomy sparing the retinacular vessels to simulate intraosseous blood disruption showed unchanged epiphyseal blood flow compared to initial measurement after capsulotomy. The pulsatile signal disappeared after transection of the retinacular vessels. Based on these acute measurements, we conclude intramedullary blood vessels to the femoral head do not provide measurable blood supply to the epiphysis once the medial femoral circumflex artery or the retinacular vessels have been damaged. We recommend the use of a safe surgical approach for hip resurfacing and careful implantation of the femoral component to respect blood supply to the femoral head and neck region in hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Each author certifies that he or she has no commercial associations (eg, consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article. Each author certifies that his or her institution has approved or waived approval for the human protocol for this investigation and that all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research. This study was performed at the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Berne and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Balgrist, University of Zurich, Switzerland.     

The Clinical Blood Transfusion Management in Rh（-） Patients

Rh（-） blood is a scarce type and plays an important role in the transfusion, hemolytic disease of the newborn, autoimmune hemolytic anemia. This review focuses on the clinical blood transfusion management in Rh（-） patients.     

Blood conservation for myocardial revascularization. Is it cost effective?

A total of 284 patients undergoing myocardial revascularization were prospectively studied to determine if the use of intraoperative autotransfusion or intraoperative autotransfusion plus postoperative reinfusion of shed mediastinal blood decreased transfusion requirements and the use of one or both techniques was cost effective. The Haemonetics Cell Saver System was used for intraoperative autotransfusion and the Sorenson Receptaseal autotransfusion system for postoperative reinfusion of shed mediastinal blood. During Phase 1, the Cell Saver System was used for 57 patients and 93 patients served as a control group. During Phase 2, the Cell Saver System plus the autotransfusion system were used in 43 patients and 91 patients were in the control group. Separate parallel analyses to compare the blood conservation groups to control groups were conducted for each phase of the study. The patient groups were comparable with regard to age, sex, preoperative red cell mass, preoperative hematocrit value, number of bypasses, and use of internal mammary grafts. Blood conservation techniques resulted in significant reductions in the use of bank blood. During Phase 1, Cell Saver System patients received an average of 2.8 units of packed cells versus 4.7 units for control patients. Transfusion was avoided entirely in 14% of Cell Saver System patients compared to 3% of control patients. During Phase 2, patients subjected to both the Cell Saver System and the autotransfusion system received an average of 1 unit of packed red cells versus 3 units for control patients. Transfusion was required in only 42% of patients subjected to both the Cell Saver System and the autotransfusion system compared to 85% of control patients. Multiple logistic regression analysis confirmed that the use of the Cell Saver System in Phase 1 and the Cell Saver System and autotransfusion system in Phase 2 were each independently predictive of decreased transfusion requirements. The total "blood-related costs" (including cost for all bank blood products plus Receptaseal and Cell Saver System equipment) was slightly lower for the blood conservation patients in both Phase 1 ($555.00 versus $615.00, no significant difference) and Phase 2 ($373.00 versus $426.00, no significant difference). Intraoperative use of the Cell Saver System is associated with substantial savings of bank blood, and the addition of postoperative reinfusion of shed mediastinal blood results in further bank blood savings. The use of blood conservation techniques is cost effective; that is, the costs incurred for the blood conservation equipment are more than offset by the resultant dollar savings for blood products.